RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 470, 25 February 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Tuesday, Feb. 23. (Before J. Giles, Esq., E.M.) O'Neil v. Collins.—Mr Tyler, who appeared for the plaintiff, stated that the action was brought for the recovery of 15s, the value of a shirt which the defendant had destroyed. The plaintiff was a lessee of some land on the south side of the river, and he had given notice to Collins to quit the ground. Shortly afterwards they met, and Collins became violent in his conduct, took hold of the plaintiff by the shirt, and tore it. It might have been open to the plaintiff to have brought an action for assault, but it was scarce-

]y of such a nature as to justify proceedings, and he had Drought a civil action instead.

The plaintiff: After I tad given him the notice, the defendant asked me how dare I interfere. I told him to desist or I would take a remedy. He threatened me, and took hold of me by the shoulder. He took a part of the shirt away with him, and threw it on the ground. I afterwards asked him for the value of the shirt. He told me I was a crawler, and to go into the house. I only had the shirt on three times. I gave him no provocation except serving him with the notice to quit. By the defendant: I did not say " Tou ugly-looking hangman, you must clear out of this. It is in chains you should be." After the shirt was torn I said you should be in chains because you looked so black and ugly. The defendant: It is a very provoking thing, your Worship, to call a a human being an " ugly-looking hangman, and that he should be in chains." Surely that was sufficient provocation. The plaintiff: I believe he would have struck me if I had not called out for people to notice. William Hannah, a waterman, was called by the plaintiff as a witness. He refused to give evidence unless he was paid, and, after receiving 10s, he stated that he heard " a row " between the plaintiff and the defendant, and he saw the defendant place his hand on the plaintiff's shoulder, but he could not say that the defendant tore the plaintiff's shirt. He saw the plaintiff take his shirt off, and he " saw light through it," but he could not say whether it was torn or not. The defendant was asked by the Magistrate if he wished to give any evidence. He said: It is such a trifling matter altogether, that I don't want to go swearing in the case at all. I leave it all to your Worship. Tou have heard the witnesses against me. I was in possession of the land when the plaintiff was a servant-boy over there. The Magistrate said that, as the defendant offered no defence, he must say that he was very foolish to come into court about a trumpery case which he might have settled for a few shillings. Instead of doing so, he had let the case come into court, and had involved himself in court expenses and fees for witnesses and a professional man. He (the Magistrate) was not satisfied as to the amount of damage done, but he would give judgment for 10s, with costs. Including costs, the defendant had to pay £2 15s. Wednesday, Feb. 24. (Before C. Broad, Esq., E. M.) Woolfe v. O'Conor.—This was a claim for £22 75., being £ls, the stakes in the race for the Butcher's Purse at the late Westport races, and £7 75., the value of a pair of jockey boots offered to the winner of the same race. The plaintiff, Mr Wallace Woolfe, claimed to be entitled to the stakes and prize as part owner of the horse Grasshopper, and he sued Mr O'Conor as ono of the "stewards who had awarded the stakes to another horse, Mr Kingham's Selim. The case wag heard before Mr Broad, as Dr Giles was required as a witness, having been judge of the races. Mr Pitt and Mr Tyler appeared for the plaintiff. Mr Pitt stated the case, and Mr Tyler examined the first witness.

Wallace "Woolfe : I produce the programme of the Westport Baces in December last. It included one race described as the Butchers' Purse. I made arrangements with Mr Freeth to run a horse called Grasshopper. Mr Freeth is a butcher and dealer. I entered Grasshopper for the Butchers' Purse. Selim and Deerfoot were the other horses which ran. Grasshopper, of which I was part owner, came in first. In the evening Mr O'Conor told me there was a protest entered against me for one or two of the races, and that I was to meet the stewards at the Albion Hotel at nine o'clock. I went there and waited till half-past nine, but there was no one there but the Secretary (Mr Milne,) who gave me a letter stating that I had been there. Three or four days afterwards, on the day of settlement, I applied for the stakes. The stewards, for whom Mr O'Conor was the spokesman, stated that no decision had been arrived at. I told Mr O'Conor that if the stewards gave the stakes to anyone else I should sue them. I went to Greymouth, and on returning I found the stakes, £ls and a pair of boots valued at seven guineas, had been given to Mr Kingham, the owner of the horse Selim. I was on the Sports Committee, and as a committee-man was on very bad terms with Mr O'Conor. So was Mr Freeth. He and I were among those who signed a letter requesting that Mr O'Conor should withdraw, as he made himself so disagreeable. By the defendant: I was to giro Mr Freeth £5, winning or losing. I have not given him the money, hecause I have not received it. I do not say that I will not give it him. "We had no written agreement. The Magistrate, interrupting the evidence, said he thought there was a point upon which the plaintiff must be non-suited. The ticket of the entry of thehorsehad been produced, and the entry was made in the name of Messrs Woolfe and Freeth. Proceedings could not be taken except in their joint names. The contract was not between Woolfe and O'Conor, but between Freeth and Woolfe and the defendant. Mr Tyler argued that the ticket had not been put in as evidence of tho

ownership of the horse; and, so that the case might be heard on its merits, he asked that Mr Freeth's name should be added to the plaint. Mr O'Conor objected. He was not prepared to enter upon a defence except towards the plaintiff by whom he had been summoned. The Magistrate was distinctly of opinion that the action could not be maintained. There was no alternative but to nonsuit the plaintiff. Mr Pitt asked that a note should be taken of the objection and of the application to amend the plaint. Mr O'Conor applied for expenses for his witnesses, and 10s each were allowed to Messrs Seaton, Campbell, and Freeth. |